SEPTEMBER 10, 1998-vol30n3:Interdisciplinary structures 'vital'

VOLUME 30, NUMBER 3 THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1998

Interdisciplinary structures 'vital'

By CHRISTINE VIDAL
Reporter Editor

Interdisciplinary structures are good for UB and should be considered vital to the future of the university, according to a report presented to the Faculty Senate Executive Committee Sept. 2 by members of the Committee on Interdisciplinary Studies.

The committee, chaired by Iain Hay, Grant T. Fisher professor and chair of the Department of Microbiology, was formed in Nov. 1997 by Provost Thomas Headrick to examine the status of interdisciplinary studies at UB and make recommendations on future policy.

In its examination, Hay said, the committee found that while there are benefits to interdisciplinary study, there are a number a problems that need to be addressed, including "clear barriers" to the development of interdisciplinary activity at UB. An inventory of programs is needed, as is standardization of the current "hodge-podge" of names. There also are teaching issues that need to be resolved, he said.

Interdisciplinary structures should exist because of their academic value, and not because they are perceived to be "cash cows," noted H. Lorraine Oak, associate dean in the School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences and a member of the Committee on Interdisciplinary Studies.

In addition, promotion and tenure issues still should be addressed at the departmental level, although individuals who spend considerable time in interdisciplinary departments should receive credit for that work, said Hay.

But FSEC members voiced concerns that interdisciplinary programs don't necessarily work in the best interests of individual departments.

Faculty members who are involved in interdisciplinary structures "sometimes take away from the department and don't contribute to the intellectual life of the department," said Don Schack, professor of mathematics.

"It's not a win-win situation," he said. "I know of several cases of proposals for interdisciplinary centers because there's money in them thar hills."

Interdisciplinary programs, he continued, are "something people worry about because people believe that the only thing less likely than a dean teaching again is a multidisciplinary structure being out of money again."

Hay disagreed. A number of multidisciplinary programs have been folded over the years, "although probably not all that should have been," he said.

Funding of interdisciplinary programs also is a source of contention, because the university has "no clue what these funds actually are being used for," said Cedric Smith, professor of pharmacology and toxicology.

Tracking down how funds are being used is a problem, agreed Oak.

"The committee had a very difficult time even getting that much information. We agree completely with what you're saying," she said. "I've had a number of people interested in where the individual costs go."